Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: RBNW....new and improved! Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:09am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: 10-10-10

Such a long, long time to be gone and a short time to be there.....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 8:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

My birthday is tomorrow, 10-11-10, and being a computer scientist I'm pretty excited about having a binary birthday.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 9:27am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

There are 10 types of people - those who understand binary and those who don't.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 9:48am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

har har

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 9:53am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

har har har-py birthday, youngster!

:-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diamondhead Date: Oct 12, 2010 10:39am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Happy birthday youngster. I'm old enough to be your grandpa. I graduated high in 1963. Hey, I'm old enough to have shaken JFK's hand. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: unclejohn52 Date: Oct 12, 2010 11:00am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Should we take you literally DH -you graduated "high" ... man, you were ahead of your time. When I graduated hs in 1970, the weed we had was so poor - full sticks and seeds that exploded... no comparison to the high-octane hybrids around today.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diamondhead Date: Oct 12, 2010 4:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Heh. Isn't modern technology wonderful?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: RBNW....new and improved! Date: Oct 10, 2010 11:27am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

bet you are excited about 10-11-12 !!!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 12:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Hadn't thought of that, but that will be cool!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:11pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I have to admit, that is a cool one.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

One thousand years ago it was 10-10-1010. Remember Tell?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

ha ha ha ha ha

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dead-head_Monte Date: Oct 10, 2010 8:31pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Senator John McCain has W Tell covered on this one. It was McCain who was there on 10-10-1010.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 1:07pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Ha--you know, out here I get too much exposure to the crusty ol mariner; funny thing is, I didn't mind some of his positions a decade or so back, but he hasn't aged well with me politically speaking.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Tell! Get a fracking grip! I can't hold back the tides of irrationality single-handed, damn it!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:59pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I knew it was "bad" of me the minute I started to respond, but I am reading about Syd and his gnomes, and scarecrows and what not.

I'll get on track now...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 3:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

In tribute to Syd (who I hold in far greater esteem than that wanker Lennon) one of my favourite songs:

I've got a bike.
You can ride it if you like.
It's got a basket, a bell that rings,
and things to make it look good.
I'd give it to you if I could, but I borrowed it.

You're the kind of girl that fits in with my world.
I'll give you anything, everything, if you want things.

I've got a cloak, it's a bit of a joke.
There's a tear up the front, it's red and black,
I've had it for months.
If you think it could look good then I guess it should.

You're the kind of girl that fits in with my world
I'll give you anything, everything, if you want things

I know a mouse and he hasn't got a house.
I don't know why I call him Gerald.
He's getting rather old but he's a good mouse.

You're the kind of girl that fits in with my world.
I'll give you anything, everything, if you want things.

I've got a clan of gingerbread men.
Here a man, there a man, lots of gingerbread men.
Take a couple if you wish, they're on the dish.

You're the kind of girl that fits in with my world.
I'll give you anything, everything, if you want things

I know a room of musical tunes.
Some rhyme, some ching, most of them are clockwork.

Let's go into the other room and make them work.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 8:39am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Well, THAT is a reason to be interested in dates!

Have a good one, MC.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 9:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Thanks! I'll be taking a trip to Cambridge MA to visit my grandmother, which will be great. I'm turning 21... kind of surreal.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 11:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Oh my frickin gawd! Not another ONE...are you serious? I somehow forget (hmmm...don't even go there) how many of you kids (!!!) are Forumites these days. I have chatted so much with DPol's that I always recall he's a college age punk (thus "junior" to me), but I have completely lost track on your case...Holy Cow! You were only SIX when JG passed, and I had "dropped out" of the DEAD for SEVEN yrs on the day you were born (I was a daddy, but don't recall if I sat down and cried).

If only I could be 21 again...I'd love to go through meeting my wife again; I'd love to go through all the family gatherings (with everyone present), and most pathetically--and trivially--I'd love to have my 21 yr old knee and lumbar region back!

Have fun with Gram; always loved chatting with mine--one wasn't around much, but the other always greeted me with a piercing, tear producing pinch on the cheek (no, not THAT cheek), and a loud "Howse ma little man?"...hated it then, but love it now.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 11:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Garcia's death was one of my earliest memories. Dad came home from work heavily bummed, I think he was crying, and he put on some dead CD (Without A Net i think, but I'm not sure why I think that) and told me what had happened. I don't think I knew who the dead were at that point. Then I didn't actually really start living and breathing the music until college.

It's strange turning 21; it seems kind of a weird number for everybody to get so worked up about, probably more to me since I don't drink anymore anyway. It's also going to be weird because it's fall break here, and barely anyone is around, so it's just going to be my and my grandma. She's decidedly _not_ of the cheek-pulling variety, she's a sassy British woman and she's actually really engaging, if a little (ahem) forward. Don't think I've ever visited her by myself before, so this should be interesting. All my other grandparents have passed, so I'm trying to bond with this one as much as I can these days.

Not sure what show to grab for the drive out to Cambridge, it's roughly four hours away, so I might go for a couple '68s... hmmm...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: roughyed Date: Oct 10, 2010 9:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Happy birthday as it's now 10-11-10 in Britain, or is it 11-10-10? Ask your Grandma!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:31pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

happy birthday, many happy returns of the day ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

thanks ringo!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dead-head_Monte Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

You graduated High School in the digital world. I'm not sure how to express that year in binary, as I don't know which year it was.

I graduated High School in the analog world. I'm damned proud of which year it was.

Class of 69!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:12pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

That was defn a good yr; 67 was another...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:35pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Yes, Sir Wm. how is it you managed to graduate at such a tender age.

and a hearty +1 for Monte's "Class of '69"

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

As I understand it, you're '56 vintage (thereabouts anyway) so how did you manage to graduate high school in '67? I'm perfectly prepared to accept that it was an early manifestation of genius (rather than a recent manifestation of senility...)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Hmmm, not sure I got ya; did you think I meant I did? Sorry--crossed our wires there--you wouldn't insist I have to have graduated in it to view it as a good year, right? I just knew a lot of folks that did in the SF area, and it was a good yr to come of age, so to speak. My yr, mid 70s, was a bit blah, if you follow. If I could've picked a yr to graduate from HS it would've been 67, let me put it that way...but, of course, looking back on it now, I am happy enough to have been stuck with the yr I was. Led Zep was king, disco was around the corner, and 70s butt-rock was in full swing.

Hmmm, well, maybe I do wanna swap still...?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 3:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

OK - forgive me. I naively assumed (more fool me) that since high school graduation was the current topic that your post might just have had some glancing relevance to said discussion. I apologise for failing to anticipate that your maverick nature would latch upon this opportunity to nominate some random date with obscure though no doubt meaningful significance to yourself. Furthermore, if the tongue in cheek nature of this riposte is not obvious to you I shall feel obliged to deliver a swift kick to your posterior.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:24pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

111 - '07

or,

11111010111 - 2007

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: shakeitupnow Date: Oct 10, 2010 6:52pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

hey kiddo! happy bday! as a relatively new forum member I figured you were some kind of old fogey like the rest of us. so glad you are here.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnightcarousel Date: Oct 10, 2010 8:14pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

thanks shakeit! and, nice name!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: wineland Date: Oct 11, 2010 8:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Happy Birthday Midnight! Living in a world of software engineers I can appreciate the base-2.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: DeadRed1971 Date: Oct 10, 2010 12:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Is this about the 10-10-10 fertilizer my granddaddy used to put on the tobacco fields when we still had the farm?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 12:39pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Makes as much sense as anything else in this thread.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

My husband's grandparents got married on 11-11-11. So next year will be their 100th wedding anniversary.
Not that this has any more significance than anything else in this thread.

edit - with the exception of MC's birthday, which is of course highly significant.

This post was modified by ringolevio on 2010-10-10 21:30:05

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

You mean will or would have been? I rather think a 100th wedding anniversary would be an unprecedented feat.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 10, 2010 5:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

You're technically right, but "would have been" doesn't sound quite right, either.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 5:35pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Under the circumstances as I understand them, 'would have been' sounds exactly right. What alternative could there be?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 10, 2010 5:57pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

IMO, anniversaries, like birthdays occur even after death. August 1st is still Jerry's birthday. On that date he would have been X years of age.

That date is still the anniversary of their marriage. Therefore "will be" is OK with me. I must admit, I am simply a communicator. Politeness often saves me from lack of grace(or proper use of the language).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 10, 2010 6:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

interesting point.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 5:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

This has ended up being an interesting thread; on this pt, I have to agree with Rob that one would say "would have been", just like, "if Jerry was here, he would be 68 today" or some such...sure, the date continues, but the person is what makes the event(s) alluded to in these cases. Or did I misunderstand?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 6:29am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I'm not much of a grammarian. Probably Rob knows the grammatical principle involved, i.e., exactly what verb tense we're talking about (or would be talking about, or would have been talking about last night, if I knew what I was talking about!)

A dubious confession from an editor, I know; I edit by how things sound to me, that is, by instinct. I'm not sure if I were (was?) editing something, if I would have changed that or not. Probably depending on the context. In a sentimental context, I'd leave it alone, I think, picking up unconsciously that it's not a rational thing to believe that anniversaries "go on" happening after the parties involved are dead ... If I were editing an academic text and it said, for instance, "Next year will be the 100th anniversary of the such-and-such discovery ..." - hm, still not sure. I do think in some way anniversaries continue.

Probably only continuing to be interesting to the serious nerds among us. Don't make me go google this :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 6:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Trust me, I know the feeling! I am terrible at it, as my posting shows, so I too implicitly go with the Wordsmith--if ever there was an appropriate handle for a poster, that's the one. Of course, my day to day editing is restricted to a very narrow field, and for it, rote memorization of "the" standard approach is all that is necessary, and my anal retentive streak serves me well in that regard. I do love to write, but I don't write well; as all of you that have struggled to understand my blatherings can attest.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 6:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

nevertheless, i feel from a quick look around that the wordsmith is not right this time ... of course, i'm looking at how language *is* used rather than what the rule books say ... editors always walk a fine line between enforcing "rules" (often over authors' protests) and recognizing that usage changes. the main thing is to remove, and even more importantly not to set up, road blocks to readers' understanding. I think saying next year "would have been" my husband's grandparents' 100th anniversary sounds wrong, causes the reader to pause over the meaning, whereas if we say it *will* be their 100th anniversary, everyone grasps the meaning immediately. Probably no one actually thinks this means they are still alive.

see, I can be pedantic too :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 7:00am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I disagree; the "will be" causes me to instantly think that incredibly, they are still alive, but the other causes no surprise, and I just skim past it...Trying to be objective here, and that's my gut feel while reading them. But, I accept that I do not know the actual fact of the matter.

In defense of it, we of course say about you or I that "...next year will be the..." about anything, right? But if I really quit the Forum, you'd feel okay about saying "...next year would have been Tell's fifth yr at the Forum..." or some such.

I do agree about "the rules", as with split infinitives: knowing the rule, and what you want to achieve, such as emphasis, it is perfectly acceptable to split them, etc. I have heard many a good writer make exactly that case. But those that do so unknowingly are the problem.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:09am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

How about "will mark" rather than "would mark"? Perhaps it's not the "will" or "would" but the "be".

10-10-2110 will mark the 100th anniversary of this thread. I really hope it is dead by then. If not, then 10-10-2110 will be the 100th anniversary of this thread.

To me, "10-10-2110 would mark the 100th anniversary of this thread" implies the possibility that 10-10-2110 may never happen.

Let's go around again.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:28am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10


>10-10-2110 will mark the 100th anniversary of this thread. I really hope it is dead by then

LOL.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Whether this thread is long forgotten or still rambling on into eternity 10-10-2110 will mark its 100th anniversary and it will be the 100th anniversary. You're really just saying the same thing twice.

"10-10-2110 would mark the 100th anniversary of this thread" is just a ludicrous construction.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I guess there is an issue with marking the day of the event versus acknowledging the union of 2 people.

11-11-11 will be the 100th anniversary of their wedding day.

11-11-11 would have been their 100th anniversary.

Thank you Wordsmith.

This post was modified by high flow on 2010-10-11 19:36:02

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:33pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

The point is that you say 'will be' if the marriage is ongoing and 'would have been' if it's over (through death or divorce). Right now I can say it will be my birthday in November, but if between now and then my liver explodes, you'd have to say it would have been my birthday in November.

Got would, flow?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:40pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I don't have the will for would.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Oct 11, 2010 10:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

ringo -- i have to agree with WT; when i read your yesterday's post ... "will be their 100th..." i immediately paused and thought about it for a second or two because it didn't 'sound' right; however, that's neither here nor there, i was more interested in the fact that you actually knew the date of their wedding; retaining that sort of info. is completely alien to the way my brain works; cheers

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

He (my hubby) only remembers it 'cus it was 11-11-11, see? To drag the thread back to the original topic ... if they hadn't gotten married on such an interesting date, it seems very unlikely any of their descendants would be remarking on it a hundred years later.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 7:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Ok - I guess I'm in with the nerds, and a fine bunch of people you are too.

Regarding anniversaries, my understanding is that they come in two forms, personal and public. A public anniversary is usually set in stone, and involves a counting back to an event. For example, next year will be the 400th anniversary of the first performance of Shakespeare's The Tempest. There is no conceivable way that we could justifiably say 'next year *would have been* the 400th anniversary' because it's an event that cannot be removed from the historical record.

However, a personal anniversary, which would be something like a date of birth, or a date of marriage involves counting forward - keeping a record of time passed since the initial event. As long as the person (or the marriage) remains alive the count continues, but in the event of death (or divorce) it ceases. We no longer say "X will be 100", but "X would ('had he lived' is understood) have been 100". Under no circumstances would it have made any sense to have said last week that John Lennon *will be* 70 on October 9. On the other hand it will be perfectly correct to say that on December 8 John Lennon will have been (not would have been) dead for 30 years.

Make any sense?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 9:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: "GC" at the Forum

Yup; whoops--I was already on "your side", so doesn't count for much...maybe I can be scored as an innocent victim, so much collateral damage due to a smart bomb of grammatical correctness? Note how I cleverly weave multiple aspects of recent postings into one lame post?

Geronimo! [If alive, next yr WOULD HAVE BEEN the sesquicentennial for Cochise to reflect on his mistreatment by "us" vis-a-vis his part in the conflict at Apache Pass. Rats--just mixed historical events with personal. My bad]

Sorry, better splain it: GC for grammatical correctness, or Geronimo & Cochise, famous Chiricahua Apache leaders of yester-year.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:19am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Put another way, Rob, maybe it depends on the context. Whether I would pause over this construction in editing would depend on the material. If the context is the descendants of these individuals sentimentally enjoying the notion of the grandparents' wedding anniversary, I would not change a construction that implies, as someone else said, that anniversaries go on and on despite the death of the individuals.

If I were editing formal academic text I'd be more inclined to apply a strict grammar rule, that is, to insist on the reality that after they're dead they really don't go on having anniversaries, and that these people's wedding anniversary is not a significant public or historic event.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Oct 11, 2010 10:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I always thought it was more appropriate to say that once a person or persons involved in an event were no longer with us that it was more appropriate to discuss their birth or the event as an anniversary of the event. In other words Oct. 9th was the 70th anniversary of John Lennon's birth, not his 70th birthday. I guess in the case of Ring's grandparents it might be more difficult as the difference between the 100th wedding anniversary and the 100th anniversary of the day they were married is pretty subtle.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 10:23am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I don't see any difficulty with the grandparents example at all. There is no difference between "the 100th wedding anniversary" and the "100th anniversary of the day they were married" - both are exactly the same thing. The point is, that you can only say it *will be* their 100th anniversary if they are actually still married; if they are dead or divorced then you have to say it *would have been* their 100th anniversary. I can't say it happens very often, but Ringolevio is definitely wrong on this one.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:08am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I'm not convinced. I don't doubt you can find me a rule somewhere that asserts this principle of distinguishing public and private anniversaries in this manner, but I'm not convinced it's either common usage or *should* be common usage. It isn't particularly uncommon for grammar rule books to assert various things that are best ignored.

I think if you say it "would have been their 100th anniversary" it sounds even more preposterous; it causes the reader to stop and think about whether there is actually some scenario in which they are or could be still alive -- it draws the reader's attention to the absurd rather than to the reality, i.e., that their descendants, sentimentally, are still whimsically counting their anniversaries even though obviously these individuals are long dead. It wastes the reader's time considering an unlikely interpretation. If you write that it will be their 100th wedding anniversary, no one misunderstands this - seriously.

One key principle in editing is that fewer words, and simpler constructions, are usually better. Grammatical purity is not the only consideration.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I guess we're done, if you are (I can go on forever) but I do think the "would" is actually not causing the issue you describe...just try it with any number of events you are detached from. The "will" defn makes you think "it" will happen, but the "would" instantly clarifies "it" will not actually happen, but would have...

See what I mean when you try it a few times? "Winston Churchill would have been..." and "William Tell would have said..." Putting "will's" in there just doesn't work.

Right?

Don't get me wrong, I just enjoy chatting about it...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

well, since several people have said they really *did* wonder at least briefly if my husband's grandparents were still alive and celebrating a 100th anniversary ... perhaps I am wrong.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:02pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Hey Wouldiam Tell - I agree.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 11:47am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

There is nothing at all preposterous about "would have been their 100th anniversary" it's just flat out the right thing to say if the circumstances are that the marriage is over. No one with the ability to read those words would pause for even a second to consider the extraordinary possibility that the couple were still alive. Your preferred 'it will be their 100th anniversary' is the construction that categorically will waste the reader's time in bemused contemplation of a 120-year-old happily married couple. You can say *it will be* the 20th anniversary of their deaths, but you have to say *it would have been* their 100th wedding anniversary.

The most fundamental principle of writing and editing is clarity - and if that sometimes takes a few more words then so be it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:07pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Well, two editors could go at this all day probably, but in my opinion, there are far fewer circumstances in which there is categorically one "right thing to say" (in terms of grammar, usage etc.) than a lot of people think. The strictest grammar rules are there in service of clarity; when they aren't actually aiding clarity, they start to change, i.e., people ignore them. The only reason to enforce them is to make the text more readable.

But I've conceded that in this case, since so many people did say they wondered whether my husband's grandparents were still alive, you're probably right that "would have been" would make it clearer.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

And in this instance 'will be' and would have been' are used exactly for reasons of clarity.

'will be' - the marriage is ongoing
'would have been' - the marriage has ended

Sometimes there actually is a right thing to say.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 12:56pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10 X 10 X 10 X 10 = Tell's posts

"William Tell WOULD be out of our hair if he had meant what he said in that lame retirement post; as it is, we WILL have to put up with him forever; would that it wasn't so, but tis."

--Anon., 2010, Forum

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 1:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10 X 10 X 10 X 10 = Tell's posts

If Will will will it then:

So let it be written, so let it be DONE!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 11, 2010 1:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

"...clarity...and if that sometimes takes a few more words, then so be it"

Ah...the pseudo-converse is also true: "Tell more often than not uses too many words to convey far less than could have been possible"

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 11, 2010 1:12pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Hmmm.... telling.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Oct 10, 2010 6:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

It still sounds wrong to me. The date will happen. The anniversary won't happen, but the date will happen. Obviously, I don't know what I'm talking about.

edit - barring the end of the world, I suppose, the date will happen. But the end of the world isn't till 2012 ...

This post was modified by ringolevio on 2010-10-11 01:09:01

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Oct 10, 2010 12:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10 - uh yeah

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_9g-WoezG8

If you do not smile, you are broken. Enjoy everybody!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 1:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10 - uh yeah

Always pays to read between the lions.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: wineland Date: Oct 11, 2010 8:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10 - uh yeah

Perfect. My youngest is in the beginning stages of reading. Looks like we'll be working on e's this afternoon. Talking monkeys are always good for a laugh. Thanks Flow.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 5:24am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

And, wow, it only happens once every hundred years...

Yawn...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: DeadRed1971 Date: Oct 10, 2010 2:28pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

Kind of like the McRib sandwich.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 10, 2010 6:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

What is it with dates? People seem preoccupied with them--I won't even go into the 1999 biz (jeeezzz). I do admit, I always THINK about watching when my car odometer is about to turn over at 100,000 mi, but I always forget. I wouldn't live my day by such matters--taking any significance from it whatsoever.

Or is that just cause I getting older and crankier?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 10, 2010 9:30am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

It's probably that people love to see patterns - our brains are likely wired for pattern recognition. That and the ceaseless search for significance where there is none.

I think I was always cranky, but as I get older I'm less inclined to hide it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jim F Date: Oct 10, 2010 11:46pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

I've always felt it is rather insensitive to non-Christians to have to base their calendar on the birth of Jesus. Or the assumed birth of Jesus. Which is a week before we change the year. Now I'm confused.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: snori Date: Oct 10, 2010 3:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 10-10-10

10 minutes and 10 seconds past 10 o'clock today.